From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: cpufreq on-demand governor up_treshold? Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 22:34:48 -0400 Message-ID: <20050511023448.GA25506@redhat.com> References: <200503140829.04750.lkml@kcore.org> <42354400.7070500@tremplin-utc.net> <20050511013334.GB8039@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050511013334.GB8039@redhat.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: cpufreq-bounces@lists.linux.org.uk Errors-To: cpufreq-bounces+glkc-cpufreq=gmane.org@lists.linux.org.uk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: Eric Piel , Jan De Luyck , cpufreq@zenii.linux.org.uk, linux@dominikbrodowski.net On Tue, May 10, 2005 at 09:33:34PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 08:57:52AM +0100, Eric Piel wrote: > > Jan De Luyck a =E9crit : > > >Hello lists, > > > > > >(please cc me from cpufreq list) > > > > > >I've since yesterday started using the ondemand governor. Seems to= work=20 > > >fine, tho I can't seem to find a reason why it keeps scaling my pr= ocessor=20 > > >speed upwards tho the processor use never exceeds 30% (been watchi= ng top=20 > > >-d 1).=20 > > : > > : > > >Any hints? > > You can try the three attached patches in the order : > > ondemand-cleanup-factorise-idle-measurement-2.6.11.patch > > ondemand-save-idle-up-for-all-cpu-2.6.11.patch > > ondemand-automatic-downscaling-2.6.11-accepted.patch > >=20 > > They are available on the cpufreq list but as it's difficult to acc= ess=20 > > it I'm sending them again, all together. These are the last things = that=20 > > Venki and I have been working on. It should solve your problem=20 > > (actually, only the last patch, but it depends on the two previous=20 > > patches). Please, let me know if it works. > >=20 > > BTW, DaveJ, Dominik, I couldn't find them in the daily-snapshot=20 > > available at codemonkey.org.uk. Should I worry, or is it just due t= o=20 > > some latency between your private trees and the public one? >=20 > I'm preparing the first cpufreq->linus sync right now. > Can you write up some descriptions & signed-off-by: lines for > these three please ? Additionally, it'll need tweaking to diff on top of whats currently in the pending queue. looks like the patch at http://www.codemonkey.org.uk/projects/cpufreq/pending-patches/CPUFREQ-04-= ondemand-cleanups.patch upsets yours a little. Thanks, Dave